Firstly it is only being developed by a single parntership (Canon and Toshiba) who are being cagey about reavealing tech details. Since they certainly have it all wrapped up in patents, one is forced to conclude that there are problems with the tech. Compare with OLED for which problems like blue pigment lifetime are public knowledge, because no-one "owns" OLED tech. c.f. open vs closed source software.
Secondly, it appears to consist of millions of little CRTs. How can this be less expensive or more reliable than plasma? That's a million cathodes, each with its own heater. At best the displays will weigh as much as 1/2 inch thick glass, which is a lot for a 60 inch display. The same kind of expensive and hot-running drive circuitry as plasma screens will be required.
As for DLP, stuff like that's been on the cards for decades. It hasn't become cost-effective and it never will because things like OLED are intrinsically cheaper. Ask youself this about DLP: if they can move mirrors quickly and accurately enough to make a good display, then they should be able to make an equally good LCD display. Oh, they can't. What a shame.
...will wipe the floor with plasma, CRT and LCD technologies. It's still being perfected at the moment and there are problems with the intensity/lifetime of the blue elements. Once that's fixed it will pwn the entire display industry virtually overnight: cheap to make, runs cool, about 0.5mm thick, effectively instant response time and rugged (you may be able to roll them up like a carpet).
Plasma screens will vanish as suddenly as they appeared once this stuff arrives. It's already production-viable in small versions for mobile phone displays and the like, where it is destroying LCD (the only other technology used in those devices) as you read this.
Isn't the idea of free software that it should be available for others to modify (free as in freedom etc)?
If so, it should be possible to modify the name too. Linux is a more successful name than GNU for reasons given in earlier comments. Stallman should adopt Linux as the name for the whole thing (as the public have for years). But he'd better do it quickly before Linus starts actively protecting the trademark!
If that happens, I bet the GPL will gain a clause to the effect of "the licensee prohibits the use of the software in free applications whose tracemark is actively protected". Or something.
I didn't understand any of that story. I clicked on the lineks but the seites didn't mean anyhting to me either, apart from a cool looking Lego spaceship.
I love the way greens and environmentalists always refer to "this world" rather than, for example, "the world". It's like they feel they have to always remind us of the world's constant closeness or immediacy, and the importance of keeping that in mind at all times. Then while we gasp in awe at the realisation that Gaia is all around us, we buy their nonsensical theories. Damn hippies.
So whenever they build a new airport, you have to recompile the kernel?
And you have to check the airport data by hand to make sure it has no trojans. You always do that right?
And and and... you only agree to tell air traffic control your position if they agree that if they tell anyone else your position, they have to quote the entire GPL too.
Enough trolling for now.
Jon Carmack is a typical male programmer. Like all males, he can only think of one thing at a time like a cold hearless single-threaded computer brain. That's why he can only write programs that way. There should be more female games programmers. Females have a compassionate multi-threaded mind which can be both more intuitive and more practical. Female programmers would naturally relate to multi-threading and reap the benefits in processing power.
However unfortunately all the games would be about buying shoes and your only weapon would be a handbag, which would suck.
2) It isn't poetry, it's propoganda via poetic quote taken out of context. The "bright" people picked up on that quote, changed its meaning and now use it to persuade others that there is some prior or intrinsic reason why information should be treated in a manner commensurate with the "bright" people's political adjenda.
it's broadcasting SSID AND giving IP addresses to anonymous persons that qualifies for giving permission.
No. You just made that up. There's nothing about broadcasting either of those things that counts as an invitation.
Houses often display their house number prominently near the door. That doesn't invite you to enter that property. Cars display their license numbers, but that's not a license to go for a joy-ride.
An SSID is just that: an SSID. You are inventing the idea that something more is implied. And who are you to do that? Common culture and law both expect that permission is only granted when a human being gives it.
A machine that broadcasts a numerical code to another machine might assist that machine in opening a connection, but no human being has sent a message of invitation, therefore no invitation exists and you shouldn't do it!
In due course we (the UK) will restore soverignship over the north American terratories. Think about that before you mock our great institutions of power.
not only is it pretty clear that no one would want strangers in their house - It is clear to me that some people might not want strangers using their modem/router and possibly volume-capped broadband service.
but that you are also trespassing on someone else's property - Trespass is a good example of a crime that is technically victimless but which most people agree should be in place. It is a precident for a "cyber-tresspass" law that would address this issue and others, like zombie networks.
The police also consider open doors fair game for entry - I'd be surprised if this is true. I certainly don't want the police entering my house without a warrant!
Rather like if a webserver is publicly accessible, then anyone can connect to it is a bogus analogy. A website is like a shop or a library. That is what the web was set up for. But that wouldn't ligitamise knowingly accessing a private corporate intranet just because the IT guy accidentally left it open one day any more than it is legitimate to enter a shop that is closed just because the owner forgot to lock up.
how can you differentiate what access points you are allowed to access? - Questions like this arise with almost every property-related law. You must find out from the owner first either by direct communication or via a notice. If you cannot/will not do that then you will have many problems fitting into society quite apart from internet access.
businesses especially pollsters and advertisers are allowed to assume that any phone number is fair game to be called unless it is on the federal do not call list - The problem is that many people would like to receive certain unsolicited calls eg from someone who found your lost cat, and you can't announce the fact that you will allow such calls in the case of telephones. But you can indicate that your WiFi is available by various means.
Another analogy is potentially FM radio - That's not remotely close. FM broadcasting is purely opt-in by both parties. No-one is taking control of anyone else's communication equipment or consuming other people's pay-for services.
I and most other people don't care if they use some of my lawn as long as it isn't too close to the house - And what if they do get too close to the house? You will ask them to stay clear of the house, then you will ask them to keep off your garden altogether, and finally you will call the police and get them arrested. All the while they may have done no damage at all. My point? No-one should assume they have a monopoly on what is reasonable in the context of sharing.
I have an [blah blah] for those that do want to use it - I'm glad you're rich enough to be generous to people who own WIFI laptops but won't shell out for a broadband connection of their own.
If there's one kind of champaigne socialist that really gets my goat, it's people in the top 0.1% of global earnings who can afford to make expensive but insincere and ineffectual gestures of generosity, and then snobbishly expect everyone else to do the same. I hope the neighbours' kids tread the f**k out of your garden, especially in the forbidden part right next to the house.
Remember, it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich hippie to get over his guilt complex.
...and together we can rule the home cinema, as subwoofer and centre speaker. Together we have the power to play the sound effects of Jurassic Park^H^H^H^H^H^H^HReturn of the Sith as they were destined to be...
...even if energy is FREE (as in beer) or clean (as in the toilet) it still causes bad things to happen when it is used...
That's silly. Energy exists in many forms and is so deeply intertwined with human life that you might as well say "even if humans stopped using energy altogether they would still cause bad things to happen like - er - stepping on pretty flowers or something"
Life is complex and inherently wasteful. Improvements come in little steps and sometime via round-about routes. Problems with the clean-ness of hydrogen will get less bad as technology improves. Any increase in the efficiency of any process or machine takes it closer to being a perpetual motion machine. We won't ever make one, but the struggle to get ever closer is more useful than sitting there saying "Energy itself is bad due to chainsaws".
Secondly, it was supposed to be compatible with DOS and FAT16.
See http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firm ware/fatgen.mspx for the FAT32 spec. You will notice that the specifications for FAT are an emergent phenomonon coming from years of fire-fighting compatibility problems with third-party implementations, not something carefully thought-out then written down in advance.
If the UN takes over the internet, they should be prepared for insurgency on a massive scale. It turns out that sometimes people don't like what they believe is theirs being forcably taken over by outsiders even if the stated aims are noble.
Your opinions seem a little biased to me. You seem to either accept claims as gospel or disregard them as patently ludicrous based on little more than your political opinion rather than anything factual.
As for the UN running the internet, the internet doesn't need central control, so why bother? If you want to influence the 'net, put up a website with your ideas/optinions. That should be sufficient for anyone. No more is needed.
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly it is only being developed by a single parntership (Canon and Toshiba) who are being cagey about reavealing tech details. Since they certainly have it all wrapped up in patents, one is forced to conclude that there are problems with the tech. Compare with OLED for which problems like blue pigment lifetime are public knowledge, because no-one "owns" OLED tech. c.f. open vs closed source software.
Secondly, it appears to consist of millions of little CRTs. How can this be less expensive or more reliable than plasma? That's a million cathodes, each with its own heater. At best the displays will weigh as much as 1/2 inch thick glass, which is a lot for a 60 inch display. The same kind of expensive and hot-running drive circuitry as plasma screens will be required.
As for DLP, stuff like that's been on the cards for decades. It hasn't become cost-effective and it never will because things like OLED are intrinsically cheaper. Ask youself this about DLP: if they can move mirrors quickly and accurately enough to make a good display, then they should be able to make an equally good LCD display. Oh, they can't. What a shame.
My money's still with OLED.
Plasma screens will vanish as suddenly as they appeared once this stuff arrives. It's already production-viable in small versions for mobile phone displays and the like, where it is destroying LCD (the only other technology used in those devices) as you read this.
If so, it should be possible to modify the name too. Linux is a more successful name than GNU for reasons given in earlier comments. Stallman should adopt Linux as the name for the whole thing (as the public have for years). But he'd better do it quickly before Linus starts actively protecting the trademark!
If that happens, I bet the GPL will gain a clause to the effect of "the licensee prohibits the use of the software in free applications whose tracemark is actively protected". Or something.
I didn't understand any of that story. I clicked on the lineks but the seites didn't mean anyhting to me either, apart from a cool looking Lego spaceship.
Dough! Some nut has found a security hole in my PDA and jammed it!
Would someone please post a feed-line so I can post a funny reply and get some karma.
Thanks.
I love the way greens and environmentalists always refer to "this world" rather than, for example, "the world". It's like they feel they have to always remind us of the world's constant closeness or immediacy, and the importance of keeping that in mind at all times. Then while we gasp in awe at the realisation that Gaia is all around us, we buy their nonsensical theories. Damn hippies.
OK, I'm really stopping now.
So whenever they build a new airport, you have to recompile the kernel? And you have to check the airport data by hand to make sure it has no trojans. You always do that right? And and and... you only agree to tell air traffic control your position if they agree that if they tell anyone else your position, they have to quote the entire GPL too. Enough trolling for now.
However unfortunately all the games would be about buying shoes and your only weapon would be a handbag, which would suck.
2) It isn't poetry, it's propoganda via poetic quote taken out of context. The "bright" people picked up on that quote, changed its meaning and now use it to persuade others that there is some prior or intrinsic reason why information should be treated in a manner commensurate with the "bright" people's political adjenda.
3) Huh?
Re: the bible, it says a lot of things. So what?
No. You just made that up. There's nothing about broadcasting either of those things that counts as an invitation.
Houses often display their house number prominently near the door. That doesn't invite you to enter that property. Cars display their license numbers, but that's not a license to go for a joy-ride.
An SSID is just that: an SSID. You are inventing the idea that something more is implied. And who are you to do that? Common culture and law both expect that permission is only granted when a human being gives it.
A machine that broadcasts a numerical code to another machine might assist that machine in opening a connection, but no human being has sent a message of invitation, therefore no invitation exists and you shouldn't do it!
In due course we (the UK) will restore soverignship over the north American terratories. Think about that before you mock our great institutions of power.
If you believe it does then you misunderstand the concept of property and have an underdeveloped awareness of cultural norms.
not only is it pretty clear that no one would want strangers in their house - It is clear to me that some people might not want strangers using their modem/router and possibly volume-capped broadband service.
but that you are also trespassing on someone else's property - Trespass is a good example of a crime that is technically victimless but which most people agree should be in place. It is a precident for a "cyber-tresspass" law that would address this issue and others, like zombie networks.
The police also consider open doors fair game for entry - I'd be surprised if this is true. I certainly don't want the police entering my house without a warrant!
Rather like if a webserver is publicly accessible, then anyone can connect to it is a bogus analogy. A website is like a shop or a library. That is what the web was set up for. But that wouldn't ligitamise knowingly accessing a private corporate intranet just because the IT guy accidentally left it open one day any more than it is legitimate to enter a shop that is closed just because the owner forgot to lock up.
how can you differentiate what access points you are allowed to access? - Questions like this arise with almost every property-related law. You must find out from the owner first either by direct communication or via a notice. If you cannot/will not do that then you will have many problems fitting into society quite apart from internet access.
businesses especially pollsters and advertisers are allowed to assume that any phone number is fair game to be called unless it is on the federal do not call list - The problem is that many people would like to receive certain unsolicited calls eg from someone who found your lost cat, and you can't announce the fact that you will allow such calls in the case of telephones. But you can indicate that your WiFi is available by various means.
Another analogy is potentially FM radio - That's not remotely close. FM broadcasting is purely opt-in by both parties. No-one is taking control of anyone else's communication equipment or consuming other people's pay-for services.
I and most other people don't care if they use some of my lawn as long as it isn't too close to the house - And what if they do get too close to the house? You will ask them to stay clear of the house, then you will ask them to keep off your garden altogether, and finally you will call the police and get them arrested. All the while they may have done no damage at all. My point? No-one should assume they have a monopoly on what is reasonable in the context of sharing.
I have an [blah blah] for those that do want to use it - I'm glad you're rich enough to be generous to people who own WIFI laptops but won't shell out for a broadband connection of their own.
If there's one kind of champaigne socialist that really gets my goat, it's people in the top 0.1% of global earnings who can afford to make expensive but insincere and ineffectual gestures of generosity, and then snobbishly expect everyone else to do the same. I hope the neighbours' kids tread the f**k out of your garden, especially in the forbidden part right next to the house.
Remember, it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich hippie to get over his guilt complex.
Why would I want to go back to 1985. I was there once and that's quite enough 1985 for one lifetime.
...and together we can rule the home cinema, as subwoofer and centre speaker. Together we have the power to play the sound effects of Jurassic Park^H^H^H^H^H^H^HReturn of the Sith as they were destined to be...
...Linux could guide me though installing device drivers or a GCC cross-compiler!
That's silly. Energy exists in many forms and is so deeply intertwined with human life that you might as well say "even if humans stopped using energy altogether they would still cause bad things to happen like - er - stepping on pretty flowers or something"
Life is complex and inherently wasteful. Improvements come in little steps and sometime via round-about routes. Problems with the clean-ness of hydrogen will get less bad as technology improves. Any increase in the efficiency of any process or machine takes it closer to being a perpetual motion machine. We won't ever make one, but the struggle to get ever closer is more useful than sitting there saying "Energy itself is bad due to chainsaws".
See http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firm ware/fatgen.mspx for the FAT32 spec. You will notice that the specifications for FAT are an emergent phenomonon coming from years of fire-fighting compatibility problems with third-party implementations, not something carefully thought-out then written down in advance.
If the UN takes over the internet, they should be prepared for insurgency on a massive scale. It turns out that sometimes people don't like what they believe is theirs being forcably taken over by outsiders even if the stated aims are noble.
But I wouldn't want to have to go to The Hague or wherever to be served.
Actually, it's the despotic dictators who blame trade practices. The starving people blame the despotic dictators.
As for the UN running the internet, the internet doesn't need central control, so why bother? If you want to influence the 'net, put up a website with your ideas/optinions. That should be sufficient for anyone. No more is needed.
L'ser